Personal documents are confidential and not for prying eyes

THE PHOTO of a divorce agreement in Wuhan, Central China’s Hubei province, aroused fierce discussion after it was posted online, because it revealed the couple owns 63 apartments. Beijing News comments:

Journalists have already confirmed that the divorce agreement is true, and the woman involved has explained how it was posted online: She hoped to buy a new apartment so she printed two copies of the agreement and submitted them to the real estate developer and a bank. She said she intends to sue both of them for breach of privacy.

If there is any evidence to prove one or the other is responsible for posting the agreement online it will need to pay the penalty for its deed, as it is illegal.

In this age of high housing prices, it is understandable that people have paid so much attention to the divorced couple’s agreement, as between them they own 63 apartments. However, the owners are entitled to their privacy, which is protected by the law.

The Supreme People’s Court stated in an earlier judicial interpretation that such deeds constitute a violation of a person’s rights and wrongdoers should be punished. And, since August last year, it has removed divorce cases from the list of judgment documents that can be published online. A divorce agreement is a private document, not a judicial document, so it should enjoy higher privacy.

The man and woman in this instance are not public employees and most of the apartments are reimbursement for their land and demolished houses. Therefore, the public should respect the law and refrain from invading their privacy.

The case should also teach the employees of banks and real estate companies a lesson: They get to see many confidential materials, and they are responsible for keeping them private.